24fandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Allison Taylor
January 20th 2017 How do we know it is 2017, was this confirmed anywhere? I know we see that it has been 2 years since this day and 3 since that day 6 since that day etc- but we can't say a definite year without knowing EXACTLY when Day 1 took place. WaffleStomp 17:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC) :The year I wouldn't know about (I thought the producers thought of that year or something) The January 20th bit is solid enough, since I read somewhere that they now alsway host inaugurations on that date. -- Matthew R Dunn 17:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Yes. January 20th is the day of every Presidential Inauguration- it used to be March 4th. However- since we don't know what year Day 1 took place on, and can only use speculation because of the Presidential election- 2017 is not correct- I just want to wait for one of the Admins approval. WaffleStomp 18:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC) : Proudhug is our resident timeline expert... any opinions on this one? As far as I know, this 2017 date could be correct since I remember something about the timeline being more certain now. But I'm not certain, and we need to be. 18:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC) :: Well, "January 20" doesn't even come from an IU source, so it's pointless to include the line. --Proudhug 01:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC) : Even if we learn the year of Day 1, it would be pretty difficult to nail a timeline down because we don't know what month it was. --SignorSimon (talk/ / ) 10:09, 22 February 2009 (UTC) This is waffle, I'm not logged in because I'm on a cell phone and its annoying too- January 20th is the day Presidents are inaugurated, however we don't know how it is in 24- so it can't be there. Even if you can make a timeline- there has not been any in season reference to what year it is ever- so any timeline making is pure speculation. Wouldn't it be 2016 because a president a president's term in every 4 years so every 4 years a president is re-elected or a new president is elected and in real life the next one would be 2012 and 2016 follows so i think it would make more sense for it to be 2016 then 2017 Smallville944 23:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)Smallville944 :I haven't much knowledge on how US politics work, but here's an example; Obama was elected President on November 2008, then he was inaugurated January the following year (this year, unless you read this in 2010 ;) 2017 would sound more plausible because she was elected in 2016, but wasn't inaugrated until the next couple of months, in 2017. I know I may not make much sense at all, in fact, I don't understand what I'm saying either. -- Matthew R Dunn 19:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC) :Since Taylor was elected President in 2012, she likely took office on January 20, 2013 until her resignation in May 2014 due to her involvement in the cover-up of the IRK President's murder President Taylor's Political Party I'm curious as to what you guys think what party she's in. I say Republican, although she could be Independent. It was established that David Palmer was a Democrat, correct? So, following the Office History established in the show: Palmer/Prescott (Democratic) > Keeler/Logan, Logan/Gardner, Gardner/Whoever (Republican) > Palmer/Daniels, Daniels/Whoever (Democratic) > Taylor/Hayworth (Republican). This is of course, assuming that Wayne and Daniels were Democrats. I would assume that Wayne shared his brother's political philosophies as well as political party. Azure Syaoran 19:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC) : Just a few days ago I had a very similar convo with another user (apologies, but I can't seem to find it right now). Essentially, I believe these are logical deductions, but I'd be much more comfortable if there was an in-universe reference to Wayne definitely being a Democrat like his brother. Maybe he's a "RINO"? we just can't be sure of our assumption unless there's an IU reference to validate it. 20:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC) :: And since there's no IU reference to it, any speculation has no place on Wiki 24. Please keep in mind that this site is not a message board and asking for people's opinions on the show should be done at another website, or at least on a User Talk page. --Proudhug 22:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC) *Spotted this, its not an in-universe reference though. http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2008/11/cherry_jones.html. Quote: "Would President Taylor see eye to eye with our president-elect? I absolutely think she would see eye to eye with Obama. I will say that, regardless of my policies, my hair will be read as pure Republican." I take that she mean's she's republican. Got a question. Where does the info about her being a Senator before elected come from? I need to reference it here. SteveTalk 22:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC) : She was addressed as senator in the beginning of Redemption. As for the hair thing, isn't that definitely a joke about her conservative hairstyle? 22:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC) ::Of course. How stupid am I 9_9. SteveTalk 03:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC) Unamed User: I was wondering if someone could get a thumbnail for Taylor in the episode she was currently in. Perhaps at the hospital while she visits her husband. I'm not necessarily going to use it just yet, but when we get more info on her in the next episode so there is more room between thumbnails. Not to make to many caption images, but I thought there was pretty important scenes with her in that episode. If someone could that, it would be great. Unamed User: Thanks for the thumbnail. It looks great! At first, I thought she was a Republican, too, given what we know about previous politicians' political affiliation. But then it occurred to me - how do we know Taylor was Daniels' opponent in the general election? She could have beat him in the Primary. Hypnometal 13:21, April 7, 2010 (UTC) : Which, if she was Daniels' primary opponent, that would make her a Democrat as well. Hypnometal 13:55, October 21, 2010 (UTC) :: Unless it was specifically stated, a fact isn't eligible for inclusion in the iu article body. This is good in the notes and it's already there, I think. 20:52, October 21, 2010 (UTC) Taylor has been president for six months when season 7 starts? Here's what I'm trying to figure out, if Wayne Palmer had just started his presidency during season 6 (I think I remember 11 weeks being mentioned), and season 7 is set 4 years after season 6, How is it possible she has been in office 6 months? :Because she was inaugurated in 24: Redemption, which took place six months before Season 7.. I think. -- Matthew R Dunn 00:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC) ::Yep, I'm fairly certain now. According to the season 7 page, Redemption takes place 42 months (3 and a half years) since Season 6, and 7 four years after 6. -- Matthew R Dunn 00:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC) Day 8 antagonist Copying this discussion that arose on CubsFan talk page. Think it's more pertinent here. Olivia Taylor is a Season 7 antagonist because of the fact that she was behind the murder of Jonas Hodges against the orders of the President and collaborated with Martin Collier who was a Season 7 antagonist. and Allison Taylor and Charles Logan are Season 8 antagonists because they are covering up the Novakovich's involvement illegaly and trying to silence Jack Bauer, as well as having Dana Walsh illegaly tortured, even Ethan Kanin said what she was doing was grounds for impeachment and criminal indictement. just like Rob Weiss and David Brucker are antagonists. so please stop undoing my edits for no reason, the only thing i can think of for making these stupid edits is that you like Taylor so much you don't consider her an antagonist. but almost everyone else does including the main character of the show Jack Bauer, just head to the message board in IMDB and see how everyone considers her an antagonist. —''The preceding unsigned comment was added by '' : Whether I like her or not is irrelevant. We just have different viewpoints about what defines an antagonist. 24 is my favorite TV show, and over the eight years it's been on television, I think I've developed a pretty good eye as to whom can be considered an antagonist. Olivia and Allison weren't doing anything for selfish gains; the actions they took might be morally wrong, but they believed them to be right. And as long as my edits aren't lowering the overall quality of the wiki, they aren't "stupid." --[[User:Cubs Fan2007|'Cubs Fan']] [[User talk:Cubs Fan2007|(Talk to me)]] 07:40, April 29, 2010 (UTC) Well ive been watching the show since the first season came out as well, so i have a pretty good idea about what an antagonist is, it was a bit harsh to call the edits stupid youre right, but im not the only one who considers them antagonists, now even if someone doesn't do it for selfish gains they can still be considered antagonists, think of Reed Pollock in Day 6, he thought he was doing the right thing, and didnt kill Tom Lennox (which ironically led to him being arrested), so he wasnt doing anything for selfish reasons but he is still considered an antagonists. The same goes for Rob Weiss, David Brucker and Adrion Bishop, they were doing things for unselfish reasons that they thought were for the greater good, but were still antagonists. And if you think about it, half of the shows main villains do bad things for unselfish reasons that THEY believe are good, but no one else does. So Allison Taylor, Logan, Bledsoe and Pillar are thus far Season 8 Antagonists because they are breaking the law, covering up everything, sidelining Bauer and having Dana Walsh tortured. and i wouldnt be surprised if they took action against Bauer but that's just speculation. —''The preceding unsigned comment was added by '' : Fair enough. How about a compromise: unless the community comes to a consensus as to who can be considered the day's antagonists, we'll leave it as it is for now; I hate to start an edit war. And I realize your edits were done in good faith; that's why I used "undo" instead of rollback. Rollback is supposed to be used only for the quick reversion of vandalism. --[[User:Cubs Fan2007|'Cubs Fan']] [[User talk:Cubs Fan2007|(Talk to me)]] 16:01, April 29, 2010 (UTC) ::I disagree completely with labeling Taylor as an antagonist, or even Pillar, and heck, maybe even Charles Logan so far. The fact that she was willing to torture Dana Walsh, a known terrorist, means nothing. Should we also label David Palmer as a terrorist for knowingly authorizing the torture of Roger Stanton during Season 2? The thing is that these definitions tend to limit themselves to black/white characters, whereas the examples being dealt with are more in a gray area. I, for one, would suggest like CubsFan said. Leave the articles without the category until the season is over and we have a better understanding of what's going on and what will happen. Thief12 16:19, April 29, 2010 (UTC) :::My two cents. Taylor et al are actively covering up the Russian government's involvement in the murder of President Hassan (as well as the other events of the day) in order to preserve their idea of the "greater good," (sound familiar, like a few other 24 antagonists?). As much as I hate to consider Allison Taylor of all people an antagonist, she is doing what is wrong for what she believes is right (I say what she BELIEVES is right and not what is right, is peace built on a murder and subsequent cover-up a good thing?). Maybe for some people it's still too early to label Taylor, but I think that her decision to hide the bloody truth in favor of a house of cards peace agreement speaks for itself. Denji 02:54, April 30, 2010 (UTC) :::: I just reverted the Day 8 antagonist categories but I did not see this conversation. I hope I wasn't stepping on any toes. Charles Logan is an expert at making rough decisions and insulating himself from the consequences, this is why he isn't a Day 4 antagonist but his Chief of Staff is. Also, they weren't trying to cover up the conspiracy for more than like an hour. Taylor and Logan actually do intend to get the evidence from Dana. This is too "shade of grey" too put as antagonist I say. At least wait another episode right? 03:39, April 30, 2010 (UTC) :::: On second thought, Bledsoe wants to murder Walsh so he should get the category. We need to wait and see of Logan and Pillar gave the go-ahead. If they did, they need to get the category too in my opinion. Again, waiting is the annoying part. 03:55, April 30, 2010 (UTC) :::I agree with the above. Thief12 04:03, April 30, 2010 (UTC) ::::I'm fine with leaving things as they are for now. As Blue Rook said, the waiting part can be troublesome. We need to see how things play out before we make any definitive judgments. Maybe I'm wrong about President Taylor (I hope I am, I hate considering her an antagonist, and I do see how conflicted she is about all of this). Logan, on the other hand, is a snake, but as you said, he can manipulate others so that blame is deflected away from him. Maybe the next episode will help clear this up. Denji 07:09, April 30, 2010 (UTC) ::::: ok i agree with leaving things as they are for now regarding Taylor, but i am certain that in the next or next 2 episodes her actions will regard her as a clear cut Day 8 Antagonist, well in my opinion she already is but i dont wanna start an edit war either. but Charles Logan, Pillar and especially Bledsoe are already Day 8 Antagonists practically User:Delta Paradox :::::: Logan and Pillar had an obvious exchange about definitely murdering Bauer so yes they are clear antagonists at this point. President Taylor was barely in today's episode, and she has no clue what the hell Logan is doing, so I don't think anything should change with her. 04:53, May 4, 2010 (UTC) well blue rook i disagree, the definition of an antagonist i someone who goes against the protagonist, but i agree its still not totally clear, for Pillar, Logan and Bledsoe it is though, but it appears once again im in the minority of considering Taylor to be an antagonist, but she is doing something illegal and conspiring with antagonists of the season and if Rob Weiss, Adrion Bishop and General Brucker are antagonists i believe she should be as well User:Delta Paradox : That's too simplistic, though, since the show doesn't consider her to be an antagonist. She's a complication, or an obstacle, like Ryan Chappelle and later David Palmer were. You bring up those other characters but if I had my way, I would never consider Brucker/Weiss/Bishop to be antagonists. However the show clearly labels these characters as such, so there is nothing I can do or say here when the decision has already been made for me by the showrunners. 08:39, May 4, 2010 (UTC) by now Allison Taylor is a complete antagonist and the show even labels her as such, she has had a reporter arrested, she put a man in CTU who is working with Russian spies and terrorists and trying to assassinate Jack Bauer and she has betrayed Dalia Hassan. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by on 23:12, 2010 May 17 : Yes at this point I definitely agree. 04:52, May 18, 2010 (UTC) Clinton parallels The real-world parallels noted in the BGIN are simplistic and I wouldn't argue they are notable. Something about two Ls in their first names, being a woman, and being president. The two women have almost nothing in common, in reality. I mean, you could say they're both "strong" but really how significant are observations like this? 03:55, March 15, 2011 (UTC) :I don't agree with it - the name thing is a bit irrelevant. It's like saying Palmer is based on Obama - yes 24 did "black president" and "woman president", but thats about all they have in common with the real life counterparts!--Acer4666 08:29, March 15, 2011 (UTC) ::It's uncanny how Palmer and Obama's names rhyme - the first black President in their respective universes, and their names are so similar. Assuming, of course, that the L and R are silent, before anyone nitpicks... Hehe :) Oh yeah, I wasn't too clear about the two Ls thing. What I meant was this - they both have COMMON first names, but use an UNCOMMON spelling. They've both spelt their names with double Ls when the standard spelling only uses a single L. It doesn't really matter, though. I thought it was almost too much to be a simple coincidence at the time, but now I'm not so sure. Avengah 16:11, March 16, 2011 (UTC) :::Yes, I did think that's what you meant by the double L but I still thought it was a little tenuous :P I guess this sort of thing is a little subjective - if a significant amount of other users think there is an obvious link between Taylor and Clinton then we can always stick it back. And yeah, Palmer and Obama is a coincidence, they also both have law degrees (if you follow some extended-universe info on Palmer), but I still think they don't have that much in common, really--Acer4666 17:50, March 16, 2011 (UTC) After seeing the opposition to the Hillary / Allison parallels on here, I did a little digging. It seems others think of President Taylor as a "version of Hillary Clinton" or something. I forget where I saw it, hang on a minute while I see if I can find it... Ah yeah, here it is. wikipedia:Allison Taylor, at the bottom: Ken Tucker describes the character played by Cherry Jones as "Hillary Clinton if there was no Obama" and adds that this "fresh character...mingles nicely with familiar faces". For her role as Allison Taylor, Cherry Jones won the 61st Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Drama Series, the series' only award win that year. Avengah 01:55, March 19, 2011 (UTC) :One other thing I forgot to mention. I'm English and I haven't paid much attention to American politics recently, but I have seen every single episode of Boston Legal in the past few weeks, and Denny Crane (William Shatner) often talks about "Hillary", and about the fact that she's a strong woman. I was kind of basing it on that; the fact that both are STRONG women! In the political sense, of course. Even though I know nothing about Hillary's politics. Avengah 01:58, March 19, 2011 (UTC) :: But in my original post at the top of this thread I mentioned how them both being "strong" is insufficient notability. It might be notable comparison if they were both "weak" but you're not going to find very many weak women in American politics. Same thing with men, unless you're one of the Carter-haters. (As an aside, I'm not necessarily complimenting American office-holders: many are "strong"... about their patently ridiculous beliefs.) Given the precedence for those BGIN notes, there really needs to be something much more substantially noteworthy for a comparison like that. 05:37, March 19, 2011 (UTC) Taylor's home state We know the Palmer brothers were from Maryland (Wayne moved to California during college years), Keeler was from Minnesota, Logan from California, Gardner (likely from Kentucky unless the producers give us more information), Daniels was from either Georgia or Tennessee (my bet is on Tennessee). But since Taylor was a United States Senator before being elected President, what was her home state and here are some possibilities: 1. Missouri 2. Pennsylvania 3. Florida 4. Texas (Kay Bailey Hutchison is my home state's only female US Senator) :We have no way of finding out what home state she was from. It is all Speculation. Thief12 (talk) 23:42, July 23, 2013 (UTC) Will Taylor return as former president on 24 in 2014 ? Is it possible for former President Allison Taylor to return as a stateswoman trying to repair her image for her misdeeds on 24's upcoming season in 2014?--User:Conservative Democrat, 05:01 P.M., July 25, 2013 (CST) :Perhaps, but again, talk pages are not the place to bring up speculation about the show. Please restrict that to your userspace or blog--Acer4666 (talk) 22:47, July 25, 2013 (UTC)